Part XIII
How the German Jews evaluated the magnitude of the danger antisemitism posed helps understand their response, historian Ismar Schorsch opines. Most assessed that the disturbances precipitated by a small group of prejudiced individuals did not represent all of the German people. They did not worry that their legal status might be in danger or that their emancipation might be rescinded or redefined. Public denunciations would only provide a platform for the antisemites, who were not especially popular. And since the fabrications were so blatant, German Jews could not conceive the distortions could possibly persuade anybody. Silence was not merely the most “honorable” approach but also the most effective.
Other Jews, who shared the belief in human progress, viewed the current antisemitic incidents as signaling the end of the scourge of Jew-hatred, which would now yield to reason. What they failed to appreciate, Schorsch notes, was that while legal and social integration had advanced rapidly during the previous two decades, antisemitism had not been eliminated.
Another popular opinion mitigating against this was the need for organized self-defense held by the leaders of the Deutsch-Israelitischer Gemeindebund (Union of German-Jewish Communities) and others, who believed the antisemitic reaction was somewhat justified. They were disturbed with Jewish financial involvement, as middlemen and money lenders, with the struggling agricultural segment of the German economy. They seem to have been the reason why the peasants in Westphalia and Hesse were increasingly becoming impoverished and why these states were becoming centers of virulent antisemitism. When the peasants were unable to repay their creditors, who were often Jewish, the parcels of land would be divided and sold at a sizable profit. The local Jewish community criticized these Jews, and the peasants loathed them.
The absence of discretion shown by German Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz became another source of controversy. Schorsch explains, “Graetz had tactlessly blundered in his condemnation of the anti-Semitic sentiments of German heroes like [Martin] Luther and German philosopher [Johann Gottlieb] Fichte.” In view of this affront, Heinrich von Treitschke, the leading German historian and renowned antisemite, attacked Graetz for disparaging Christianity. This prompted many Jews to regard antisemitism as a legitimate response by the Germans to this provocation. If any retribution should be administered, they avowed, it should be against those responsible for the reaction.
After another wave of Jew-hatred began in 1890, a Jewish critic suggested that an Association for the Social Reform of Judaism be established in every Jewish community throughout the Reich. Each association would concentrate on improving the ethical conduct of the Jews and facilitate their integration into German society by reforming Judaism.
The failure of the antisemites to gain traction in their initial foray into Germany’s political arena seemed to vindicate their passivity, yet there was a sense of apprehension that persisted during the 1880s, Schorsch said. Though the consensus assumed that the threat had passed and the movement was now in disarray, a minority posited that only the symptoms had decreased, but the disease remained.
In a memorandum to a group considering how to reorganize the Gemeindebund, which Schorsch believes to have been written by Heinrich Graetz in the beginning of 1882, it acknowledged its fear about the future: “In the depth of the German people there still rages the hatred against Judaism and the Jews which undermines the roots of our participation in civic and political life. The apparent returning surface calm will not deceive those who know the fate of the Jewish people and who care not only for themselves and the immediate future.”
There were many examples to justify this profound anxiety about what awaited the Jews of Germany. Jewish students at the universities reported being socially excluded and having to conceal their Jewish identity. This treatment of Jewish students by the future leaders of Germany demonstrated how antisemitism had become mainstream and an acceptable way in which to act towards one’s fellow student and citizen.
The charge that Jewish law approved a double moral standard in dealing with Jews and non-Jews placed the Jews in a very delicate situation. Several projects composed of Jewish scholars were compelled to clarify ethical conduct in Judaism.
Christian Intercession on Behalf of German Jews
For many years, German Jews understood they could not oppose antisemitism alone. Intervention by Christians was essential. The Verein zur Abwehr des Antisemitismus (the Association for the Defense Against Antisemitism), or Abwehrverein, as it was called, was established in 1891. Their public declaration, endorsed by some 500 prominent Christians from every walk of life, denounced antisemitism as being contrary to the nature of the German people. They believed that as German Christians, antisemitism clearly affected the quality of their own lives.
There were 13,338 members in the Abwehrverein from all over the country. After trial and error, the Abwehrverein began organizing the events where the antisemites were most active and in places where they were not yet operating. Lack of funds forced them to abandon this strategy.
From the outset, they did not use the courts to fight antisemitism, fearing it was a lost cause; it would only provide a platform for defendants to advance their own agenda while transforming them into martyrs and heroes. Furthermore, once the courts showed slight interest in reprimanding protesters, little could be done to prove the courts’ failure in some way absolved the perpetrators of their crimes. If the establishment disregarded the antisemite, the public might easily conclude that agitators might be correct.
Openly opposing antisemitic candidates was another tactic employed. Posters and pamphlets were published, and speakers were made available. Funds were offered to the candidates’ campaign on the condition the person renounce antisemitism.
To provide extensive analysis of antisemitism in Germany, Mitteilungen, a weekly paper, was launched on Nov. 1, 1891. After Jan. 1, 1911, it became a biweekly. As the most comprehensive resource on the subject, the goal was to have the information reprinted in the local press. The program had limited success, since many editors were hesitant to utilize the information. Critics claimed the project was too academic to reach those “most seriously infected,” Schorsch said.
The victories of the antisemites in the Reichstag elections from 1893 to 1907 were interpreted by the leadership as a display of frustration by the peasants, artisans, and Junkers, who were experiencing the negative effects of the rapid economic transformation of the country. Conspicuous Jewish economic success exacerbated the animosity. Individuals like Heinrich Treitschke and Adolf Stöcker legitimized and sanctified the hatred of Jews “with the virtues of religious and national passions; they did not create it,” Schorsch said.
Social forms of antisemitism were another area that could not be ignored. The Abwehrverein insisted Jews be appointed to the judiciary, the civil service, the teaching staffs, and especially the officer corps. In Prussia, where most of the Jews resided, they were rarely able to secure positions in the state administration, the office of public prosecution, state elementary and secondary schools, and universities. They were not alone. The Prussian government, Schorsch said, was unwavering in wanting to sustain the Christian and conservative character of the state. The attempt failed.
Ultimate Goal of the Abwehrverein
The Christian leadership of the Abwehrverein became increasingly critical of German Jews about Jewish separateness. Their concern became clear when several Jewish fraternities and clubs were established: the Association of Jewish Students at the University of Berlin was formed in 1895, and the Union of National Jewish Sports Clubs was created. Zionism was particularly disconcerting, since it risked Jewish citizenship throughout Western Europe. Zionism might revive reservations about the extent of Jewish patriotism and concern about Jewish consciousness.
These real concerns exposed the “latent intolerance of German liberals for Jewish survival, which manifested itself periodically since the end of the 18th century,” Schorsch concludes.
Dr. Alex Grobman is the senior resident scholar at the John C. Danforth Society, a member of the Council of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, and on the advisory board of the National Christian Leadership Conference of Israel (NCLCI). He has an MA and PhD in contemporary Jewish history from The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.